Jump to content

Talk:Dave Hensman

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

BLP noticeboard

[edit]

An issue relating to recent edits on this article has been referred to the BLP noticeboard. - Sitush (talk) 15:09, 2 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Someone is reversing unflattering comments under his Business career section. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 142.179.122.82 (talk) 04:12, 30 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Reversed twice, even though a consent order is a public document. What's going on? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 142.179.122.82 (talk) 04:14, 30 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You seem to be giving undue weight to that information and pushing the same POV as has been pushed in recent months, and you seem to be a WP:SPA. 108.58.177.203 (talk) 04:18, 30 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Why do you care to make such unflattering comments in the first place?   — Jeff G. ツ (talk) 04:20, 30 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Undue weight? He admitted to professional misconduct. How is that not relevant? Do you think Moses only got to include the good about his life and not the faults? It is also public information and cited. As far as being a special account, up until today I didn't know anything about the issue. I listened to him as a kid on Crack the Word, and I even went to his church occasionally. I just googled his name when I saw there was a change at the Pitt Meadows church which I thought he was still part of. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 142.179.122.82 (talk) 04:24, 30 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
We do not include every bit of minutiae about someone's life. He is not known for the issue to which you refer and therefore it is of minimal relevance to the article. Read up on it at WP:DUE if you wish. Thanks. - Sitush (talk) 04:27, 30 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
You guys are protecting him for some reason, and seem to changing your objection. The POV and UNDUE objections are not applicable since the subject admitted the facts. As for minutiae, the business was cited, and that makes it fair to comment on his business dealings. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 142.179.122.82 (talk) 04:32, 30 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Let me see if we can reach a compromise. Will you let the consent order link stand if it goes to a site other than strata watch? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 142.179.122.82 (talk) 04:34, 30 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
(edit conflict) Hm. Every message you leave here makes me more convinced that you are indeed that WP:SPA who was causing problems some months ago. Should we mention every parking ticket that the guy got also? Assuming that he has had some, of course.
And in answer to your second point, no. - Sitush (talk) 04:37, 30 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Please read Wikipedia:Biographies_of_living_persons/Noticeboard/Archive113#Dave_Hensman - Sitush (talk) 04:39, 30 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Assuming I am a SPA because I am anonymous is bizarre (I'm not even an account). For further certainty, I solemnly declare my previous statements to be true. I find it astonishing that you equate this to a parking ticket. Is it your view that only offenses under the Criminal Code should be included? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 142.179.122.82 (talk) 04:47, 30 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

My view is that we should abide by the consensus of the Wikipedia community. You are not going to get your way here, sorry. - Sitush (talk) 04:49, 30 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the link to the previous discussion. It appears this has been hashed out before, even though I find the decision bizarre. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 142.179.122.82 (talk) 04:57, 30 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Followup procedural question about POV and UNDUE objections (so I can learn for next time). I read the previous discussion on the archive and it looked like UNDUE was invoked because a large portion of text was copied in; that did not occur on my edits. Could someone explain their rational for raising it on my edit? Also about the POV. My understanding is that POV is about facts, which was not in dispute in my edit. Could someone also explain their rational for raising it? 142.179.122.82 (talk) 05:14, 30 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I suggest that you read the policy documentation. It is not uncommon for there to be various policies cited when issues such as this arise, and often there is a cumulative effect. The net result of the BLPN discussion that I linked earlier was that this info should not appear at all, and various reasons were given.
Now, if you want to raise it again at WP:BLPN then there is nothing to stop you from doing so. However, I would advise you not to bother. Now, as then, I know nothing about this guy - I didn't even attend his church or listen to him on the radio as you did, nor have I ever knowingly been within, say, 2000 miles of him - but it is clearly of such trivial significance. You would have to demonstrate multiple, reliable, independent sources have referred to the issue and (ideally) that it have had some sort of impact on him. On the occasion of the BLPN discussion, it seemed that little such evidence was available, so unless you can produce substantial new verification etc then you'll most likely be wasting your time and that of other people. - Sitush (talk) 05:24, 30 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the clarification. Sorry for being a pain and not reading the previous material and the guidelines. I retract "You guys are protecting him for some reason". Best Regards 142.179.122.82 (talk) 05:48, 30 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. If you get stuck/need advice on the generalities of policy etc then feel free to drop me a note on my own talk page.Even if I cannot answer it, there are a fair few people who keep an eye on the goings-on there and who have vastly more experience than I. Doubtless, they would jump in. And, yes, it is true that I am not always right & they are more than happy to tell me so! - Sitush (talk) 06:15, 30 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Dave Hensman. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 09:40, 27 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Dave Hensman. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 09:56, 5 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Dave_Hensman&oldid=1211960379"